|
|
|
The Mercury Block II | Hodgson Schilf Evans
- Thread starter MCXavierL
- Start date
David A
Senior Member
I don't mind the 3 storey walk ups, they served and continue to serve a purpose of providing affordable housing, but the problem is they are way too common in some areas like Oliver.
It will be nice to have more variety. Also the newer buildings proposed are taller and without a back surface parking lot, so you can have more density and residents on the same size lot. It is a good way to gently modernize and upgrade the area.
It will be nice to have more variety. Also the newer buildings proposed are taller and without a back surface parking lot, so you can have more density and residents on the same size lot. It is a good way to gently modernize and upgrade the area.
SMayo
Active Member
The problem with tearing down the "tired" walk-ups is that half the time the lot sits empty for multiple years before the new construction is started. Fingers crossed that thats not the case here.
David A
Senior Member
There really should be a penalty clause in every demolition permit. Give them one year or so to start to build and after that a penalty at least equal to the property tax on the previous building and increasing after that.
Most of the places I have seen torn down and sit empty for years have been older houses, some historic and would have been quite nice if fixed up or maintained. Its a shame to see blocks of nothing for years and years in some parts of downtown when it is getting harder and harder to find housing.
Most of the places I have seen torn down and sit empty for years have been older houses, some historic and would have been quite nice if fixed up or maintained. Its a shame to see blocks of nothing for years and years in some parts of downtown when it is getting harder and harder to find housing.
thommyjo
Senior Member
I mostly agree. Except the challenge of leaving old structures is that they can also deteriorate, get squatters, have fires, etc.
So I don’t think “not demolishing” is always the solution. But I do think minimum standards should be enforced. Grass and a nice fence like aldritt does should be the bare minimum.
David A
Senior Member
I am not saying prohibit demolition, just not to financially encourage or incentivize it any more. Lot of people do the right thing and don't allow their properties to deteriorate, but .. sigh ... some people don't and some even go about demolition by stealth.
That is why we need penalties. A lot that sits empty for years is really not doing any good for the community.
That is why we need penalties. A lot that sits empty for years is really not doing any good for the community.
Glenco
Senior Member
SMayo
Active Member
abandoned and uninhabitable buildings definitely are a different story, but quite often that's not the case, like here for example
SMayo
Active Member
Here's hoping that this one gets building by the spring, the demos left a huge hole in the neighborhood.
EtoV
Active Member
If this gets built soon, this will be one of the most urban feeling areas/intersections of the City.
SMayo
Active Member
Agreed! If not then they will have essentially moved the problem lot from one side of the street to the other.
cmd uw
Active Member
My understanding is that this project is a priority. I don't think you'll see it sitting vacant for long.
Avenuer
Senior Member
I wonder how residential leasing has gone for Mercury Block I? I imagine it's been quite strong based on what you're saying.
thommyjo
Senior Member
I’ll be visiting shortly and will try to get a sense from the leasing manager.
But based on how the Autograph team spoke at the Oliverbahn tour, this project is full steam ahead in 2024.
Bigger question is the timeline on the Shift towers. This one likely bumped ahead of those. They see the west Oliver momentum and are capitalizing.
TAS
Senior Member
Do you know what the rents are for The Mercury? Any incentives? If so, please share.